Skip Navigation


Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory Advance Access originally published online on March 1, 2005
Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 2006 16(1):1-24; doi:10.1093/jopart/mui027
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
16/1/1    most recent
mui027v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (8)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Olsen, J. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory © 2005 Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Inc.; all rights reserved.

Maybe It Is Time to Rediscover Bureaucracy

Johan P. Olsen

Center for European Studies, University of Oslo

Address correspondence to the author at j.p.olsen{at}arena.uio.no.

This article questions the fashionable ideas that bureaucratic organization is an obsolescent, undesirable, and non-viable form of administration and that there is an inevitable and irreversible paradigmatic shift towards market- or network-organization. In contrast, the paper argues that contemporary democracies are involved in another round in a perennial debate and ideological struggle over what are desirable forms of administration and government: that is, a struggle over institutional identities and institutional balances. The argument is not that bureaucratic organization is a panacea and the answer to all challenges of public administration. Rather, bureaucratic organization is part of a repertoire of overlapping, supplementary, and competing forms coexisting in contemporary democracies, and so are market-organization and network-organization. Rediscovering Weber's analysis of bureaucratic organization, then, enriches our understanding of public administration. This is in particular true when we (a) include bureaucracy as an institution, not only an instrument; (b) look at the empirical studies in their time and context, not only at Weber's ideal-types and predictions; and (c) take into account the political and normative order bureaucracy is part of, not only the internal characteristics of "the bureau."


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Public Policy and AdministrationHome page
S. Wilks
Boardization and Corporate Governance in the UK as a Response to Depoliticization and Failing Accountability
Public Policy and Administration, October 1, 2007; 22(4): 443 - 460.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 J Public Adm Res TheoryHome page
A. Willem and M. Buelens
Knowledge Sharing in Public Sector Organizations: The Effect of Organizational Characteristics on Interdepartmental Knowledge Sharing
J. Public Adm. Res. Theory., October 1, 2007; 17(4): 581 - 606.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 International Review of Administrative SciencesHome page
G. Bouckaert
Modernising Government: The Way Forward--a comment
International Review of Administrative Sciences, September 1, 2006; 72(3): 327 - 332.
[PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.